44. Allow me to join all those who have preceded me in the general debate in congratulating Mr. Fanfani, on my own behalf and that of the delegation of the Syrian Arab Republic, on his election as President of this twentieth session of the General Assembly. We should also like to express our regret at the accident which he has suffered and to wish him a speedy recovery. The problems that are being raised and discussed here are a matter of concern to the peoples of the world. The election of Mr. Fanfani to this high office is a testimony to the qualifications which have made of him a statesman of merit not only in his own country, but also on the international plane. I am sure that his objectivity and great experience will be a positive factor in guiding our discussions towards the truth.
45. May I also take this opportunity to welcome the new Members of the United Nations, Singapore, the Maldive Islands and the Gambia, and also to thank the Secretary-General for his excellent report presented to the Assembly [A/6001 and Add.1.] and to express the appreciation of my Government for his untiring efforts to save world peace.
46. While this session opened in a tense international atmosphere, it is undoubtedly a matter for rejoicing that now there is relative relaxation. This session reminds us of others in the past that have taken place in similar conditions. It has been customary to describe such periods of crisis as historic; but all times and, basically, the life of man, are historic. The important thing is to have a historic sense in times of crisis, and such a sense means being able to judge an age in relation to its needs, its problems and its achievements, and to set its failures against the satisfactions given. The peoples of the world, wherever they are, look towards peace and stability in order to realize an existence which is more complete than mere biological existence. Man, wherever he may be found, is basically and primarily a man. If, therefore, we ask whether the United Nations has fulfilled the urgent hopes of suffering humanity, and we find that it has not done so, the question duly arises: what are the handicaps that have stood in the way? In answering this question, I humbly recall the experience of a small nation on this vast earth, an experience similar to that of all small nations, whose struggle for life is characterized by suffering and stumbling progress. It seems to me that the following are basic among those handicaps.
47. First, in spite of the great and lofty ideals embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, the peoples of the world are divided into two categories, strong nations and weak nations. The former still believe in their heart of hearts that they have a right to a better life than the weak nations. It is unfortunately a truth which stains with its dark colour the modern world, in spite of statements to the contrary.
48. Secondly, this mental attitude is a natural outcome and continuation of colonialism and imperialism, which is basically an immoral relation between force and absence of force. This relationship, throughout modern history, has been the outcome of competition among the great nations for strategic bases of force. When they occupied the Arab countries, for instance, these served as a jumping-off point to occupy other places, India and the Far East. Hence the odious sin of racialism, or the claim that some human beings are inherently superior to others, and that there cannot be an equality of rights between the powerful and the weak. Nazism made a philosophy of this doctrine, but the European Powers practised it in their relations with the peoples of Asia and Africa one hundred years before Nazism.
49. It might seem that such an assertion is outdated. But what is happening in South Africa up to this very moment, in Angola, in Mozambique and in Southern Rhodesia, or what has taken place in Aden and now is taking place in Southern Arabia including Oman is a continuation of the deplorable mentality that I am describing. On 25 September Aden's so-called constitution was suspended and the British High Commissioner became the sole ruler of Aden. The people who revolted against this long-imposed rule have been subjected to the utmost cruelly. Significantly enough, two warships have sailed into the area. We are thus being reminded of what took place in Suez in 1956.
50. All this goes to prove that the gunboat diplomacy of the nineteenth century is still prevalent when colonial Powers find it necessary to show their muscles. The realization has not been made yet that this is an outdated policy and that the peoples of the world cannot anymore be subjected to such humiliation. The only solution is to grant immediately Aden, Oman, the Southern Protectorates of Arabia, Angola, Mozambique, Southern Rhodesia, the peoples of the Union of South Africa their independence and complete equality. But what amazes me most is the fact that we are unable to find any difference in the foreign policy, as far as the Arab countries are concerned, of the Conservatives of England, who conducted a war against Egypt in 1956, and the Socialists of England today, who are following in their footsteps, or, in fact, between both of them and nineteenth century imperialism.
51. Thirdly, economic imperialism remains a fact today in spite of the independence won by many countries. Political independence and sovereignly remain ineffective as long as the poorer nations of the world are dominated by the richer ones. The United Nations has handled this problem from its foundation up till the present time, as it has been dealt with by the specialized agencies. How to bridge the gap between the poorer nations that are getting poorer and the richer nations that are getting richer is a problem to which we have come back year after year in its various aspects and manifestations. Although a great deal has been done by the United Nations and its specialized agencies in this field, yet whatever has been achieved is but a very small proportion of what should have been accomplished.
52. I am not going to enter into the details of these problems, as they are to be dealt with by the Second Committee. But one report after the other by the United Nations and the specialized agencies has consistently stressed the fact that this gap is getting wider and wider. I may mention here briefly the report entitled "The State of Food and Agriculture 1965", that was issued last week by the Director-General of the Food and Agriculture Organization, Dr. Sen. In it he points out that trade problems have figured largely in the past decade, and that the almost continuous downward trend in the terms of trade and of agricultural exports have done much to frustrate the plans for economic growth in the developing countries. The grave implications of these developments can be judged from the fact that agricultural products account for more than half the total export earnings of the developing countries, or nearly three-quarters, if earnings from petroleum products, which benefit relatively few countries, are excluded. This is a result of the fact that the colonial Powers stick to their exploitation of the developing countries, a fact to which we refer as neo-imperialism. To quote a Western authority — in fact, an American professor of economics — Professor Heilbroner, a well-known economist, had this to say in his hook, The Making of Economic Society;
"In the eyes of the imperialist nations, the colonies were viewed not as areas to be brought along in balanced development, but essentially as immense supply dumps to be attached to the mother countries' industrial economies. Malaya became a vast tin mine; Indonesia, a huge tea and rubber plantation; Arabia, an oil field. In other words, the direction of economic development was steadily pushed in the direction which most benefited the imperial owner and not the colonial peoples themselves. The result today is that the typical underdeveloped nation has a badly lopsided economy, unable to supply itself with a wide variety of goods."
53. This problem is related to the problem of the sovereignty of developing countries over their natural resources. It has been dealt with by the United Nations since 1958, and it will be returned to this year. The struggle has been sharp between the developing countries that want to liberate themselves from this neo-colonialism and the colonial Powers. But the colonial Powers will find, themselves, this year that the developing countries have been forcing their way in spite of all the handicaps. It is therefore the duty of the great Powers to awaken to this historic fact, and to retreat from their positions of strength, for this is in their own interest. This division of the nations of the world into poor ones and rich ones constitutes, as adequately referred to by the Secretary-General of the United Nations in various parts of his report, a greater danger to world stability and peace than the division of the world into two great camps on ideological bases. For the rate of growth in these under-developed countries is still much less than it should be.
54. Let us take one illustration. Whereas the net profits of the oil companies, as reported in the United Nations statistics from the Middle East, amounted last year to $1,500 million, a country like Syria is unable to find $150 million in foreign exchange in order to execute the Euphrates Dam project, the feasibility and necessity of which, after long studies by well-known international institutes, have been established beyond any doubt. If this Euphrates Dam project is executed, the national income of Syria will be doubled in less than five years. Two hundred thousand hectares of land will be reclaimed. Electricity will spread to all parts of the Syrian countryside. The industrial output will be doubled. And yet, because of international intrigues and nothing but international intrigues, this project is being frustrated.
55. Should we expand on this whole situation, we would affirm that, if the oil revenues of the Arab countries were put for the benefit of the whole area, they would alone be sufficient to raise the standard of living of the Arab peoples and to create a civilization that could compete with the highest in the world.
56. The measures taken so far to bridge this ever-widening gap are mere palliatives, whereas the crying need is to take radical measures on the international plane, inside the United Nations and its specialized agencies. Such measures are not out of reach. The United Nations has dealt with the problem of the economic and social consequences of disarmament. The United Nations publication, Economic and Social Consequences of Disarmament, states that on the basis of available data there appears to be general agreement that the world is spending roughly $120,000 million annually on military expenditures at the present time. This figure is equivalent to about 8 or 9 per cent of the world's annual output of all goods and services. It is at least two-thirds of — and, according to some estimates, may be of the same order of magnitude as — the entire national income of all the under-developed countries. It is close to the value of the world's annual exports of all commodities and it corresponds to about half of the total resources set aside each year for gross capital formation throughout the world. If an agreement on disarmament could be reached and a part of this money released for development, the foundations could be very well established. That is why we wholeheartedly support the convening of a world conference on disarmament that would include the People's Republic of China.
57. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development held in Geneva in the spring of 1964 decided for the establishment of a trade development board. The Syrian delegation was among the first five nations who presented the plan for the establishment of a new specialized agency for trade and development. Though the results of the Trade Conference were fruitful, they did not, nevertheless, fulfil all the expectations of all the developing countries. As illustrations, I should like to give the following examples:
(a) We would have liked the recommendation on "International Commodity Arrangements and Removal of Obstacles and Expansion of Trade" to have been more precise and explicit with regard to the elimination of trade barriers by the developed market economies. The statement in sub-paragraph (e) of paragraph 1, section II of this recommendation, which states that elimination of trade barriers should be completed to the fullest extent possible by the end of the United Nations Development Decade, does not express any precise undertaking on the part of the developed market economies. This is due to the fact that it will be these latter countries who will be the sole judges of what is ^possible" for them to do. Moreover, the end of 1970 is too far away a deadline, and we would have preferred it to be much earlier.
(b) We regret that the Conference was not able to adopt a recommendation for the establishment of a contemporary finance scheme similar to the development insurance fund which was proposed by United Nations experts, and which would compensate developing countries for short-term declines in their export earnings. Compensation would be in the form of either contingent loans or grants. Though we feel that the increase in the International Monetary Fund special compensatory finance facility is beneficial, it nevertheless suffers from the fact that the structure of interest rates charged on this facility is high.
(c) It is unfortunate that the two recommendations on the gradual transformation of the Special Fund and the initiation of the work of the Capital Development Fund were not adopted unanimously by the Conference. The fact that some of the most important developed market economies, that is to say the main potential contributors, opposed them renders their implementation most unlikely.
58. We feel it our bounden duty to affirm unequivocally the right of peoples to self-determination whenever the situation calls for it. That is why we deny the British occupation of Aden, Oman and the Southern Protectorates against the will of their peoples. We equally deplore the existence of remnants of colonialism, wherever they may be found, in Asia, Africa, or any other part of the world. The problem of Aden is a basically Arab problem. We firmly believe that any Arab country cannot be considered fully independent if any other single Arab country remains under foreign domination.
59. Our unbounded faith in the Charter of the United Nations, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and in the new international order impels us to emphasize the necessity of reviewing the United Nations Charter, so that it may accord with the developments that have taken place on the world scene, which we cannot in any way forget or disregard.
60. We also believe that the People’s Republic of China should be within the United Nations family. To keep this great nation outside is an error. Our delegation has consistently supported the admittance of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations, ever since the problem was raised at the United Nations.
61. I would like also to mention that my Country, the Syrian Arab Republic, has the best of friendly relations equally with India and Pakistan. We sincerely hope that the deep wisdom embedded in these two great countries will prevail over the existing conflict and that they are both find in the United Nations Charter and its various counsels what will contribute towards a peaceful settlement of their dispute. As a necessary prerequisite, we hope and urge that the exchange of fire between the two sides will stop soon and that a solution may be found in accordance with the United Nations resolutions which recognized the right of self-determination to the people of Kashmir.
62. We are enquiring about the handicaps that stand in the way of fulfilling the great ideals of the Charter and the creation of a healthy international atmosphere that would guarantee for the peoples of the world, peace and stability. We cannot disregard in this context the lack of understanding of the revolutionary liberating movements in the developing world and the distortions they have been subjected to. It has become common now to speak of the revolution of rising expectations, and of the nationalism of Asia and Africa. As an instance in point, may I take the case of Arab nationalism.
63. Arab nationalism, which grew in the last quarter of the nineteenth century and developed in this one, was the result of a historical crisis and the outcome of suffering within the Arab soul and mind. When I speak of the historical crisis, I refer primarily to the awakening of the Arabs and their subsequent contributions to human civilization throughout history. It would take me long to .dwell in that field, but may I quickly recall that when the scholars and philosophers of Greece and Rome, their great scientists, thinkers and theologians, were not able to carry on freely their meditations there, they found refuge in our cities — Damascus, Antioch, Baghdad, Beirut, Tyre and Alexandria; they found in those cities the necessary freedom for their minds to explore the hidden meanings of the world, to lift its veils and to clear the way for humanity in its search after the truth.
64. The schools of neo-Platonism and Stoicism, Jewish, Christian and Muslim theology, the schools of Roman law, grew, developed, and contributed to human culture within our cities that I mentioned. When the Arab period came, the Arabs inherited the legacy of Greece, translated it into Arabic, and expanded it with their comments. The social and intellectual problems of Arab society interacted with this legacy. Our philosophers and scientists played their role in the great conflicts of human thought. Historians in the science refer to this magnificent Arab renaissance as a miracle in the history of science. Their commentaries and great books of learning were transmitted to the West through Sicily and Padua, not to mention Spain and southern France.
65. When the Arabs declined, as have a great many peoples in history, and when the European renaissance began in Italy, the Italian scholars took Arabic science in the fields of physics, chemistry, astronomy, medicine, mathematics, and became, as historians of culture recognize today, not only an incentive to the Italian renaissance, but also one of its basic factors.
66. When Arab civilization reached its zenith — and let us remember again that it is the basic source of Arab nationalism about which I am talking — it was characterized by openness to other cultures, the Greek, the Indian and Persian. It was also characterized by tolerance among the adherents to the various religions. Thus Christian philosophy prospered and gave more of its great minds, like John the Damascene, an authority in Christian theology. Jewish philosophy and theology also prospered and gave some of its great minds, as Maimonides (Moussa ibn Maimoun), author of The Guide of the Perplexed, a classic in Judaic philosophy and theology, written in Arabic, about whom the Jews say, "From Moses to Moses, there is nobody like Moses” — all this side by side with Arab Muslim philosophy in a continuous dialogue in the spirit of community and fellowship. In this way Arab civilization gave one of the first instances of peaceful coexistence and religious and political toleration.
67. These great values, namely, openness, tolerance, and interchange, are still the fountainhead of Arab nationalism today, which gazes upon wide human horizons. Unfortunately, this nationalism was and is being distorted and misrepresented, primarily because we do not possess the international propaganda machine which international Zionism has at its disposal. However, it is necessary to mention here that, unlike European nationalism, Asian and African nationalism grew in part as a reaction to Western colonialism and its economic exploitation. No sooner was political independence realized that there grew among our peoples a social consciousness which found, and is finding, expression in socialism. It is necessary for the developed countries to realize that socialism is at the present time historically determining the trend of development in the developing countries. But this economic-political system is not static. Like any other political system, it is dynamic, self-generating, and an expression of the need of the hungry, ignorant masses who so far have lived on the crumbs of feudalism, political and economic exploitation, and imperialism, which have formed an alliance among themselves. The revolution of rising expectations in the developing countries is the greatest historical factor which has characterized the last half century, and which ultimately expressed itself in the social revolution to free man from ignorance, sickness, poverty and hunger. It is the revolution of man to realize his natural right. The denial of this right, like the denial of any other right, can lead only to complication, instability, and anarchy. The socialism of the Arab countries which adopted it as a system, like socialism in other developed countries, is a revolution of suffering — the search for dignity and the thirst for love. Consequently, it is a revolution to correct a human situation and, finally, a contribution in the service of humanity at large.
68. I come now to the problem of Palestine. My country, Syria, considers Palestine to be the southern part of Syria. This problem, which was first brought to the United Nations in April 1947, has been before it ever since. Alone among the scores of problems discussed by the United Nations, the Palestine question has been dealt with by all six organs designated by the Charter as the principal organs of the United Nations. These organs and their main committees have devoted 985 meetings to the Palestine question. It would be cumbersome to trace out their details, but I am only, mentioning this figure, 985 meetings, to show the extent of the involvement of the United Nations in this question which, nevertheless, remains unsolved today.
69. The first question that duly arises is, why is it that, in spite of all these meetings and the scores of resolutions that have been adopted by the General Assembly and the principal organs, the problem remains unsolved today? The answer libs undoubtedly in the fact that the roots of the problem were disregarded.
70. Basically, the Arab people of Palestine, a national and historical reality, which should be acknowledged by international law and dealt with as such; have been completely and purposely disregarded as far back as 1917. It has become somewhat fashionable among some commentators to express a kind of boredom over the legacy of resentment against Britain and France spawned by the 1918 betrayals of the Arabs, which included the Balfour Declaration. But, unless the full measure of what was done with respect to the Arabs in those years is appreciated, then understanding of all that followed is impossible, and equally impossible will be any solution contemplated now by the United Nations.
71. The Balfour Declaration, which promised to the Zionists the establishment of a national home for the Jews in Palestine, has been completely forgotten. People now do not talk about it at all. They start with the partition resolutions of 1947. All this is but a part of Zionist strategy and scheming. The discussions of the partition resolution, however, remain incomplete and inadequate unless and until we start with this strange Balfour Declaration. The promise to establish a national home for the Jews in Palestine was given by the British Government in 1917 which was not in Palestine, to a Jewish nation that did not exist, either in Palestine or outside, for there were Jews belonging to various nationalities and followers of Judaism as a religion. The Declaration was illegal, because the Arabs were never a party to it, and Great Britain had no authority to promise a land that it did not possess, against the will of the lawful inhabitants of the land. The Declaration was also immoral, having been negotiated between the British Government and world Zionism to ensure mutual interests to the detriment of the Arabs.
72. Many explanations have been given for this Jewish national home; among them is the one contained in the White Paper of 1922, which states:
"Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become 'as Jewish as England is English'. His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded in Palestine ...
"... When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride .. ."
Such statements, which were given time and again by the British Government proved to be nothing else but a smokescreen designed to appease the revolting Arabs.
73. Some light was shed on the integrity of British war-time pledges to the Arabs by Lord Balfour himself in a memorandum dated 11 August 1919, in which he wrote:
"... so far as Palestine is concerned, the Powers have made no statement of fact which is not admittedly wrong, and no declaration of policy which, at least in the letter, they have not always intended to violate".
74. World Zionism, and Israel, which is but a partial expression of it, undoubtedly smile cynically now when we mention the Balfour Declaration and these developments. Nevertheless all explanations that were given for the Balfour Declaration afterwards did not contain the establishment of a Jewish State in Palestine.
75. That is why the Arabs, no matter what the Arab country to which they belong, live the tragedy of Palestine every day of their lives, for the Arabs have been victims of one of the greatest acts of aggression known in modern history. The result of these tyrannical acts is deeply felt just because it is related to a central part of the Arab homeland, organically connected with all other Arab lands. This tragedy has been deepened by the sufferings of the Arab refugees from Palestine and their losses, which are shared by every class in every Arab country.
76. As recently as October 1964, the great historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in International Affairs the following:
"The Arabs' grievance against Britain for her treatment of Egypt from 1882 to 1956 has been surpassed, in intensity and in justification, only by their grievance against us for our treatment of Palestine since 1917. In whatever way the Balfour Declaration of 1917 is to be interpreted whatever may have been the meaning of a 'national home for the Jewish people' and of 'the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine' — we were taking it upon ourselves to give away something that was not ours to give. We Were promising rights of some kind in the Palestinian Arabs' country to a third party. We followed up the Balfour Declaration by insisting on our being given a mandate for the administration of Palestine, and also insisting on having the Balfour Declaration written into the document. At the same time we acquiesced in this mandate being placed in the 'A' class, a type of mandate that committed the Mandatory Power to giving independence to the population of the mandated territory as soon as they were politically ripe for it. Since, at that date, the population of Palestine west of Jordan was 90 per cent Arab ... the fact that the Mandate for Palestine was an 'A' mandate was an implicit undertaking that, whatever the Balfour Declaration might mean, Palestine would eventually become an independent state with a decisive Arab majority in its population.
"The Palestine Arabs did not trust British intentions. We repeatedly assured them that our intentions towards them were entirely honourable and equitable ...
"The responsibility for the tragedy that has overtaken the Palestine Arabs is shared by Britain with Germany and the United States. In setting himself to exterminate the Jews in Europe, Hitler played into Zionism's hands."
77. It might be said: what is the use now of going back to this old history — although Toynbee was writing in October 1964 — after the partition resolution? Our reply is that, whereas this illegal, unilateral, immoral declaration had been entered into the Mandate given to British over Palestine, and since this Mandate facilitated Jewish immigration to Palestine against the lawful will of the Arabs, and since this Jewish immigration enabled Zionism to establish a state within the State under the protection of the British Mandate and in conspiracy with it, and since the Zionists in Palestine drove out in a well-planned warfare the lawful Arab inhabitants of Palestine, we cannot forget or disregard this criminal act. We insist that it should be discussed and revealed again.
78. It might again be said that Israel is in existence. But here again the question arises how Israel ever came into existence. In answering this question I shall use the words of a prominent member of the British Labour Party, T. E. M. McKitterick, who wrote the following:
"What brought Israel into existence was, in the end, not an agreed decision but the force of arms, and all that the United Nations was able to do afterwards was to take note of the fact and try to prevent any further change from being made by similar methods. The implication is a very far-reaching one — that a collective security organisation is bound by its very nature to favour the status quo, while the initiative for change comes not from agreement but from force. "
79. It is thus clear, by the words of an author in international affairs, that Israel was brought into existence by sheer force and aggression. The methods followed in enforcing those decisions, the partition resolutions, were no less immoral than the Balfour Declaration itself. The pressure brought, especially by the United States Government, to ensure the required number of votes in the General Assembly after its failure in the Political Committee, are now facts of history, well-known, to be recounted again. But I wish simply to refer here to what President Truman himself, who was instrumental in this whole manoeuvre, wrote about the unprecedented pressure to which he was subjected by the American leaders of Zionism in his memoirs. The sad death of the then courageous Secretary of War of the United States, Mr. James Forrestal, who was driven by the Zionists to commit suicide, is another tragic aspect of this whole situation.
80. Again, not to use my own words, let me quote a Professor of International Relations at New York University, Donald C. Blaisdell, who, in a lecture entitled "Can responsible foreign policy be made democratically?", said the following:
"How could the world justify the establishment of Israel in Palestine in the face of the majority of the indigenous population? It was done in the name of democratic self-determination."
Clearly, then, the only people in the world that was denied the right to self-determination was the Arab people of Palestine.
81. If these facts are established beyond any doubt, and they are, how could the Arabs be asked to recognize the establishment of a State, in an integral part of their homeland, that was detached by sheer force, by international Zionist intrigues, pressure and distortion? All this calls for a classification of the Zionist strategy: when the Arabs objected, as they rightfully did, against the Balfour Declaration and later against the British Mandate, and when they defend their homeland against outside aggressors, they are themselves stamped aggressors. When the Arabs revolt against the partition of their homeland and the denial of their right to self-determination, they are described as defying the United Nations resolutions and also called aggressors. During this time, world Zionism, which cleverly engendered these various acts, appears to be peaceful and abiding by international law. But, surely, this game should at least be understood objectively and unemotionally.
82. What is the State of Israel? How was it conceived? What purpose did it have. Here, again, let me use the words of the father and founder of the State of Israel, Herzl himself, who wrote the following:
"If His Majesty the Sultan were to give us Palestine, we could in return undertake the management of the finances of Turkey. We should there form a part of a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism. We should as a neutral State remain in contact With all Europe, which would guarantee our existence?"
Now, these few lines are worth pondering a great deal, because, to my knowledge, they are a classic definition of imperialism.
83. Note, first, the use of the word "barbarism". Obviously, the reference here is to the Arabs, because there were none but Arabs in Palestine at that time — not more than twenty thousand Jews. What the founder of Zionism, Herzl, forgot here is that, when the Prophet Moses fled from Egypt, he found refuge with an Arab tribe, the Midianites, and with Jethro, the priest of Midian, an Arab tribe in Sinai — Moses' father-in-law, from whom he first heard about Yahwe, later called in the Bible "Jehovah". The very name of the one God that Moses preached to his followers was, as established beyond any doubt in Exodus, an Arab deity. Surely these Arabs must have been a special brand of barbarians, who taught Moses the idea of the one God — the pillar of Judaism. Thus Zionism paid the Arabs for their indebtedness to them. But here, again, I shall not dwell on this point at length. I am sure the Zionists cannot, at least, distort the words of the Bible. These are the "barbarians" about whom Herzl spoke and Zionism still speaks to the present day.
84. Further, this Jewish State was conceived by Herzl, in his own words, "to form a part of a wall of defense of Europe in Asia". The European Powers must undoubtedly rejoice at the establishment of such a State within Arab lands, to ensure, as is now being done, their strategic economic and oil interests. Surely, then, Israel is but an extension of Western imperialism. And what would the Western colonial Powers do but guarantee, as they are doing now, the existence of Israel, as foreseen by Herzl? Is it a mere chance, I may ask, that the French Ministry of Defense built in 1959-1960 the Dimona Atomic Reactor in Beersheba, in the Negev, as part of the 1956 secret deal between the Guy Mollet Government and Ben-Gurion and his henchmen; that West German, French and Belgian scientists have been working on it ever since; that the United States supplied it with heavy water this year? But enough about this for the time being, for I shall come to it later.
85. Israel is, furthermore, an expansionist State — however much the leaders of Zionism and Israel profess the contrary. Here, again, representatives will find in the text of my speech as distributed a document submitted in 1919 by the Zionist Organization to the Peace Conference in Paris — a document which underlies the plans of Zionism for Palestine — from which it will be seen that almost 90 per cent of that plan was realized. But I should like to mention just one paragraph, which has a direct relationship to a problem that is now being raised. The document states:
"The boundaries above outlined are what we consider essential for the necessary economic foundation of the country. Palestine must have its natural outlets to the seas and the control of its rivers and their headwaters. The boundaries are sketched with the general economic needs and historic traditions of the country in mind, factors which necessarily must also be considered by the Special Commission in fixing the definite boundary lines. ...
"The economic life of Palestine, like that of every other semi-arid country, depends on the available water supply. It is, therefore, of vital importance not only to secure all water resources already feeding the country, but also to be able to conserve and control them at their sources."
86. Some remarks on this document: the population of Palestine was at that time 90 per cent Arab; there were only 57,000 Jews there in 1917. The Jews owned in 1920 almost 2.5 per cent of the land area of Palestine. The figures which I shall mention below prove beyond any doubt Israel aggression in Palestine. They are as follows: area of Palestine under the Mandate, 10,429 square miles; area of Israel under the Partition Plan, 5,765 square miles; area of Israel today, 7,992 square miles. The area of Israel today shows an. increase of approximately 38 per cent over the area under the Partition Plan.
87. But this is only a partial picture. For the representatives here present who are not familiar with the names and boundaries outlined in this Zionist document, translated specifically, it means the following: the occupation beyond what Israel occupies now of southern Lebanon up till Sidon, of Southern Syria up till the gates of Damascus, and of the whole of Jordan. It is also important to remember the emphasis laid in this document on the rivers, their sources, which exist in Arab territories.
88. With regard to the atomic reactor that I mentioned, I think that not only the Arabs but this very Organization, which is striving for peace, and the leaders of the world community, who are doing their utmost to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, are, like ourselves, entitled to be warned of the facts.
89. The New York Times of 20 December 1960 reported that:
"According to the United States sources, the Dimona Reactor is capable of turning out sufficient plutonium for a modest number of atomic bombs."
90. On 28 April 1964, The Times of London reported that "there is evidence that Israel in collusion with France may soon have nuclear weapons".
91. The Jewish Chronicle of London, an authoritative organ of the Zionist movement, revealed in its issue of 26 March 1965 that Mr. Shimon Peres visited Paris recently "to convince France to build an additional nuclear reactor at Dimona". The United States, directly and indirectly, is helping Israel in this field.
92. The Zionist-Jews in Palestine lost no time. As soon as France announced in June 1959 that it was preparing to explode a bomb, they started pressing the French Ministry of Defence to build for them their atomic reactor as pledged. French and Zionist engineers and technicians completed their plans for the construction of the building in Dimona in the Negev in the early part of 1960.
93. It is thus understandable that, while Israel officials endorsed the principle of international inspection, they have opposed its implementation in Zionist- occupied territory in Palestine. Those of us who were present here at the eighteenth session remember only too well the dramatic sessions of the Security Council, when the United States representative raised the question of the existence of USSR rockets in Cuba, and what followed. But, when the Arabs object to Israel getting into the nuclear club, their words fall on deaf ears. Verite en deca des Pyrenees, erreur au-dela.
94. Time and again the Zionist propaganda machine has spoken of the Arab boycott. The Israel lobby in Washington last June succeeded in extracting from the American Congress amendments to the law governing exports intended to render the Arab boycott of Israel ineffective. Thus, once more, the Arabs appear as aggressors. And while, under the impact of Zionist propaganda, the Arabs are blamed for their measures of self-defence, everyone forgets the Israel boycott of the Arabs, which started early in this country with the establishment of the early Jewish settlements in Palestine. Ahad Ha-Am, a pioneer of spiritual Zionism, whose name figures prominently in any history of Zionism — "Ahad" being a pen name for "Ginsburg" — laid his finger on the problem, which, according to Professor Hans Kohn, himself an American of the Jewish faith and a world authority on nationalism, for practical and ethical reasons alike was the fundamental though neglected problem of Zionism in Palestine — the Arab problem. From 1891, Ahad Ha-Am stressed that Palestine was not only a small land, it was not an empty one. It c? ould never gather all the scattered Jews from the four corners of the world. Professor Kohn says:
"The Bible foresaw this in-gathering for the days of the Messiah, when all problems would be solved in a regenerated mankind. To confound Messianic hopes with political potentialities must lead of necessity to moral and ultimately physical disaster."
95. Writing about Ahad Ha-Am, Professor Kohn goes on to say:
"... He warned that the Jewish settlers must under no circumstances arouse the wrath of the natives by ugly actions: must meet them rather in the friendly spirit of respect. ’Yeti — these are the words of Ahad-Ha-Am — ’what do our brethren do in Palestine? Just the very opposite: serfs they were in the lands of the Diaspora and suddenly they find themselves in freedom, and this change has awakened in their an inclination to despotism. They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelly, deprive them of their rights, offend them without cause, and even boast of these deeds; and nobody among us opposes this despicable and dangerous inclination’. That was written in 1891 when the Zionist settlers formed a tiny minority in Palestine. ’We think’ Ahad Ha-Am warned, ’that the Arabs are all savages who live like animals and do not understand what is happening around. This is, however, a great error.’
"This error unfortunately has persisted ever since. Ahad Ha-Am did not cease to warn against it, not only for the sake of the Arabs but for the sake of Judaism and of Zion. He remained faithful to his ethical standard to the end. Twenty years later, on 9 July 1911, he wrote to a friend in Jaffa: ’As to the war against the Jews in Palestine, I am a spectator from afar with an aching heart, particularly because of the want of insight and understanding shown on our side to an extreme degree. As a matter of fact, it was evident twenty years ago that the day would come when the Arabs would stand up against us.’
"... In this spirit Ahad Ha-Am" — and this is the important point — "opposed the boycott which the Hebrews and the Jews on the whole applied to the Arabs.
"In a letter of November 18, 1913 to Moshe Smilansky, a pioneer settler in Palestine, Ahad Ha-Am had protested against another form of ... boycott, proclaimed by the Zionist labour movement in Palestine against the employment of Arab labour, a racial boycott: ’Apart from the political danger, I can’t put up with the idea that our brethren are morally capable of behaving in such a way to men of another people; and unwittingly the thought comes to my mind: if it is so now, what will be our relation to the others if in truth we shall achieve at the end of time power in Eretz Israel? If this be the Messiah’ — said Ahad Ha-Am — I do not wish to see his coming."
I wonder what Ahad Ha-Am would say if he had lived long enough to see Judaism turn into terrorism and manslaughter under Zionism.
96. It will have been noticed by now that in discussing the problem of Palestine I did not use the word "Jewish", for to us Arabs, Muslims and Christians alike, Judaism is a divine religion that we respect and is a part of our tradition. Jerusalem is also a sacred city to us. Jabra Ibrahim Jabra, a young Arab who saw his house in the Katamon area of Jerusalem dynamited by Zionist gangs and his parents killed, who was able to escape to Arab lands, carried on his studies, published several books including two books already published in England, spoke of his native city of Jerusalem in an article published in the first week of this month. He said:
"Jerusalem is not a mere place, it is also a time. Within its geographical boundaries it can never be understood — it is only within history, within 4,000 years of history all assembled in one moment, the moment in which one should look at Jerusalem. In this city history is alive, speaking out of each of its stones. It is a history full of contradiction, full of tragedy, but it is a history that is revered and adored by all mankind. ... Within its walls it gathered the meanings of both the sea and the desert, two civilizing forces in eternal interaction, two primordial forces that in alternating rhythms have borne men to conquest and achievement. In this lies the mystery of its tragedy and also the mystery of its greatness."
That is a specimen of modern Arabic literatures reflecting the deep suffering and torture of the Arab soul over the loss of Palestine.
97. We establish a fundamental distinction between Judaism and Zionism. To the Muslims, Abraham is the first Prophet, and Islam in one of its basic aspects is a return to the religious tenets of Abraham. To the Christians, Christianity as preached by Christ, himself a Jewish Prophet speaking primarily to the Jews, was a fulfilment and continuation of the laws of Moses. No apostle made this issue clearer than St. Paul himself, a great pillar of Christianity, who clearly states, in Romans II, chapter 11:
"For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin."
To him the prophecies of the Bible for the return of the Messiah were fulfilled by the coming of Christ. This is made clear in his letter to the Galatians 3:26, 28 and 29, wherein he says:
"For all ye are sons of God through faith in Jesus Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor freedman, neither male nor female; for all ye are one in Christ. If ye are of Christ, indeed ye are Abraham's seed, heirs according to the promise."
98. Zionism, on the other hand, is but a distortion of Judaism. Among the Jews themselves there arose, side by side with the rise of the Zionist movement, a great number of Jews who not only dissented from Zionism but criticized its tenets in unequivocal terms: the reform movement in Judaism and the orthodox movement, which made it very clear in their platforms and pronouncements — men like the late Judah Magnes, William Zuckerman, Sir Edwin Montagu, Elmer Berger and scores of others.
99. Anti-semitism, a sin of the Christian West, was never a sin of the Arab Muslim East, for far back in history and in recent time Jewish communities in the Arab world lived peacefully and in prosperity until the curse of Zionism upset their lives and our own. That is why we fight Zionism, a belonging to a plague of modern political ideologies, like Nazism and Fascism. The Arab struggle for Palestine is basically a struggle of a people for liberation, a people whose right to self-determination was denied, a people asking for nothing less than the right of self-determination, a people whose lands, territories, homes and farms have been stolen from them, and they are asking them back. In a word, it is a struggle for liberation from a brand of imperialism the like of which has never been known in history. Ideologically, it is a struggle to purify Judaism from the distortions, attritions and criminality of Zionism. History, the final and ultimate tribunal of mankind, will prove that Arab struggle will ultimately save Judaism from the clutches of Zionism.
100. Allow me, in ending, to quote the great Italian philosopher, Benedetto Croce, who had this to say on the subject of ethics and politics:
"In fact, the phase of the State and of politics is a necessary and eternal phase, but it is a phase and not the whole; and the moral conscience and activity is another phase, no less necessary and eternal, which follows the first, proceeding from and returning to spiritual unity. Certainly, if the second is indestructible, the first is no less indestructible; but this means simply that the second does not destroy the first, but instead exerts a perpetual influence on it, knocks perpetually at its door and perpetually makes itself heard and welcomed, yet conforming to the law which rules in that sphere."
101. Yes, when we understand that great truth, so admirably expressed by Croce, when willingly we allow ethics to knock continuously on the door of politics, reminding it of its existence, it is then that not only the problem of Palestine will be solved but the most crucial and complicated problems of mankind today.